2014 was World's Warmest Year on Record
- Thread starter Alate_One
- Start date
False Prophet
New member
It didn't feel that way last night!
A global average temperature increase of 1.4° Fahrenheit since 1880 does not mean that we will no longer have winter.
I notice a tag on this thread which reads 'science denial'.
Sorry, but global warming is rank assumption that the Left stands by for it's ability to be a corrupt Robin Hood. The scientific community makes a killing off of it, why would they disagree :sigh:
Sorry, but global warming is rank assumption that the Left stands by for it's ability to be a corrupt Robin Hood. The scientific community makes a killing off of it, why would they disagree :sigh:
Morpheus
New member
In the right part of Canada you could simply set a river on fire for heat. Oops, my mistake. Unlike other oil, tar-sands oil sinks in water. You'd have to dredge it up to burn it, or maybe the dead fish are flammable.
You can say that, but it's a little hard to believe when it keeps getting warmer. Global Warming is actually scientific fact, supported by lots of experimental evidence.
It's funny how politics makes all facts mutable, though.
Just because the Earth is going through a trend doesn't specify that global warming is a correct theory. There is no good evidence that we have anything to do with it, as a major volcanic eruption would suffice for the entire industrial age to now.
If you want my opinion, global warming is holding the science back.
Morpheus
New member
As early as 1960, when I was placed in an advanced science class, the greenhouse effect and global warming associated with industrialization was discussed. In the 50+ subsequent years I have been amazed at the accuracy of the predictions taught to me then. Denying it is only due to an unwillingness to change, especially by the monied interests profiting from oil and coal. When someone cites an alternative position the funding of that "science" can be traced back to those special interests.
That's true. There are other explanations for the warming, taken in isolation. Fortunately, the evidence isn't limited to the warming. It's the increased CO2 concentrations, radiometrically traced to fossil fuels. It's the successful prediction of changes in the climate using models that assume that human-emitted CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
Not true. You don't know the evidence, because you don't do the science. You just thought up what in your mind would be a hard problem, and assumed that there was no evidence to bring to bear against it. You are mistaken:
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/smoking_gun_humans_climate_change.html
But it is true. Why do you think scientists are more concerned with a meteor hitting Earth over the ice caps melting? That is, something statistically astronomical over something supposedly immanent?
One can throw all the 'science' they want at it, but the intent and action is so extraordinarily plain that unless you have more then what you got, you aren't going to make believers out of those on the Right. Global warming is sorely centered around dubious convenience and money; wasn't even brought up much until the political gain warranted it.
Some questions for you:
1) Do you agree that the increased burning of hydrocarbon fuels (oil, coal, natural gas, wood) has released increased amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere?
2) Do you agree that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas?
3) Who specifically are you referring to as "the scientific community" and how specifically are they making "a killing off of it"?
The Berean
Well-known member
Let's be honest here. We can go on and on about the causes on global warming. Let's assume for argument's sake the global warming is mostly man made. So what are we (humanity) supposed to do about it? It's unlikely people will give up their cars and other modern conveniences created in pollution producing factories. Also, countries like India and China are modernizing rapidly and they will want more and more cars and other modern conveniences as well.
zoo22
Well-known member
Wow. Good point. You might look into getting that published in some science journals. (As if the lefty LIEberals would ever let THAT happen!)
PS: What percentage of the earth is that cold part of Canada?
PPS: Great use of ALL CAPS! It really drives the point in!
Tinark
Active member
How do I sign up to get a piece of these riches?
Tinark
Active member
Tax carbon at an appropriate level. Scale up the tax slowly over a period of several years so people and industry has time to adapt. Reduce other taxes elsewhere to offset the tax increase, and use some of the taxes raised to fund additional research at the university level. Things will tend to work themselves out from there.
I mean seriously - we have to raise taxes somehow to pay the bills. Why not raise that revenue by taxing something harmful instead of burdening labor and capital with almost all the taxes (which is something productive)?
Green taxes. Taxing people out of a paranoid theory.
Alate_One
Well-known member
Modern conveniences don't have to be powered by 19th century technology (fossil fuels).
Solar, wind, nuclear and hydropower are all non-carbon emitting. Put more money into technology for these industries (as well as efficiency) and emissions can be cut quite drastically without affecting quality of life. It takes government intervention though, which right wingers don't want to believe is necessary, hence the opposition.
But there are market forces involved too, insurance companies are already raising rates because of the increase in weather related disasters caused by climate change. In the long run it's cheaper to cut emissions now. Unfortunately pure capitalism doesn't look at long term consequences well.